[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 34 (Wednesday, March 23, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 23, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                       REVISED ARKANSAS BAR EXAM

  (Mr. SMITH of Texas asked and was given permission to address the 
House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the Arkansas State Bar has decided 
to revise the ethics portion of its bar exam. It seems a number of 
practicing attorneys have had trouble in this area, despite having 
passed the old exam. The new test reads:
  Question 1: A State attorney general enters into a business deal. He 
put up no money, but gets a half interest in a land development company 
that will need many State government permits to operate. Discuss the 
possible ethics ramifications, if any.
  Question 2: A State Governor arranges for a business partner, who 
controls a federally insured S&L, to make payments on a personal loan 
that the Governor has taken out. The Governor then claims these 
interest payments as interest deductions on his own tax return. Are 
there any ethics complications here?
  Question 3: A State Governor arranges for a friend to get a large 
Federal grant ostensibly to fund projects for disadvantaged business 
owners. The Governor then induces this friend to lend hundreds of 
thousands of dollars to a land development company the Governor jointly 
owns. The true nature of the loan is not disclosed and the money is not 
repaid. Are there any ethics problem here?
  The new test is not hard, but to make it even easier, perhaps 
Arkansas could get the administration to do the grading.

                          ____________________